From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:60677 "EHLO plane.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751565AbaH0HKh (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Aug 2014 03:10:37 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XMXNK-0004eX-HN for linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org; Wed, 27 Aug 2014 09:10:34 +0200 Received: from ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.22.224]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 27 Aug 2014 09:10:34 +0200 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 27 Aug 2014 09:10:34 +0200 To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: Re: ext4 vs btrfs performance on SSD array Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 07:10:19 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Nikolai Grigoriev posted on Tue, 26 Aug 2014 19:39:08 -0400 as excerpted: > Kernel: 3.8.13-35.3.5.el6uek.x86_64 #2 SMP Fri Aug 8 21:58:11 PDT 2014 > x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux > Btrfs v0.20-rc1 I've no answer for your question, but you know how old both your kernel and btrfs-progs versions are, for a filesystem under as heavy development as btrfs is, right? The normal recommendation is to run the latest stable series kernel, 3.16.x at this time, unless you have specific reason not to (like the below, or because you're specifically comparing multiple btrfs kernel- spaces). Userspace isn't quite as critical, but 3.14.2 is current (with 3.16 soon to be released), and 3.12 was the first one of the new versioning sequence and currently the minimum recommended. Btrfs-progs v0.20-rc1 is as ancient as a 3.8 kernel. Tho there's a current known btrfs kworker thread lockup bug that apparently only affects those using the compress mount option. Btrfs converted from using its own private worker threads to generic kworker threads in 3.15, so previous to that wasn't affected, while all current releases in the 3.15 and 3.16 series (and 3.17 thru rc2, rc3 should have the patch) are affected. The patch is marked for stable so should end up in 3.16 stable series too, tho probably not 3.15 as AFAIK as a non-long- term-support release it's already EOL or close to it. (3.14 is an LTS but as I said the bug didn't affect it so no backported patch necessary.) So that'd be a good reason to stay with 3.14 (which as I said is LTS) for the time being, but back further than that is definitely older than would be recommended for anything btrfs related, and both kernel 3.8 and userspace 0.20-rc1 are positively ancient. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman